Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIBHU BAKHRU
Oil India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Techno Canada Inc. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction and basis of appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contractual details and timeline. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. dispute escalation to arbitration. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. claims made by tci in arbitration. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. oil's arguments against tci's claims. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 6. court's analysis of claims and limitations. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 7. waiver of claims and rulings. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 8. errors in the arbitral award. (Para 67 , 68 , 69) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
Introduction
1. Oil India Limited (hereafter `OIL') has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter `the A&C Act') impugning an arbitral award dated 01.09.2020 (hereafter `the impugned award') rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a Sole Arbitrator.
2. The respondent (hereafter `TCI') is an entity incorporated under the laws of Canada and thus, the impugned award was rendered in an International Commercial Arbitration within the meaning of Section 2 (1)(f) of
The limitation period for claims in arbitration commences upon receipt of notice invoking arbitration, not from the breach date, and claims cannot be barred if defenses were not properly raised.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that parties cannot raise new defenses at a later stage and that interest awarded in excess of the claim made by a party is not valid.
The court's decision emphasized that the fundamental policy of Indian law encompasses three juristic principles: judicial approach, principles of natural justice, and reasonableness as understood in ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the applicability of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and the due diligence of the claimant in pursuing its claims are crucial factors ....
The arbitral tribunal's decision to deny claims for damages due to lack of supporting evidence is valid under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing minimal judicial interfer....
The court affirmed that claims for breach of contract are subject to statutory limitation periods, which cannot be extended by claims of continuing breaches.
The court confirmed that arbitral awards can only be set aside under specific grounds outlined in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, affirming the validity of the arbitrator's decision regarding l....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited grounds for challenging arbitral awards under Section 34 of the A&C Act, emphasizing the principles of public policy and fundamental In....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
